Beth and Traci and "Maybe He Should Try Cocaine"
“Maybe he should try cocaine” is right behind “Japanese spin-fuck chair” on the list of things I never thought I’d hear in a church and I guess I should brace myself for GOD KNOWS WHAT because it’s also one of many bits that made me laugh mightily at “Women Alive,” the meeting of fascinating female minds that takes place each Tuesday morning in the parlor of Tabernacle Presbyterian Church. The ladies in the group showed me a good time — not a not-uncomfortable time, which I suspected was the best I could hope for throughout this project, but a really good time.
Oh, and I learned stuff, too.
Also there was praying. Whatever.
A gas-log fire burned in the limestone fireplace of the ladies’ parlor, and we sat in a circle that closed at the flames. The event started with singing, one of those hymns where the words don’t quite match the melody, and then there were prayers, generous and undemanding prayers uttered by whoever felt them among interstices of deep silence.
Somewhere in that sequence fell introductions for the newcomers. I went first, lunging into “I’m an atheist,” which this time was met with “Some of my best friends are atheists, and I’ve been there, too. Might be again this week.” Darned fine unholy ice-breaker, that.
Marilyn, a counselor and member of the group, led the session with a message about addiction that she tied into Jeremiah 2:13 — a little something about forsaking God and broken cisterns. Addiction, she told us is “any attachment that keeps us from feeling the deep pain of disconnection from God, others, and ourselves.”
Could be bourbon, could be a nasty shopping habit. In any case, Marilyn said, “You cannot stop an addiction by focusing on it.” We all tend toward addiction, she told us, so the fix is in refocusing, perhaps on a less-harmful addiction.
“Some people might stop drinking and start a War on Terror,” came a suggestion. Laughter. Follow-up: “Every time I hear him talking, I think, ‘He really needs more treatment.’”
More laughter. And then a question from someone else in the group, “Can you give an example of trading addictions?”
Cigarettes, came our answer. More addictive than cocaine. One of the hardest addictions to break. If a person wanted to stop smoking, we heard, maybe he should start picking up a book instead of picking up a cigarette or maybe he should try exercising whenever the smoking urge hit.
“Or maybe he should try cocaine.”
Maybe I should try this group. Further evidence that I was among my people right there in a church came when Marilyn talked later in the session about fasting from addictions — from anything that kept a person disconnected — (and feasting instead “on something beautiful and good”), she mentioned as an example, “You might not pick up a book for a month.”
The gasp simultaneously gasped by those 20 women sucked the air right out of the room. It was replaced in the next instant by a guffaw.
Beth and I hung around a while after the meeting ended, talked with various ladies (and one unctuous pastor), and then stepped out the doors of Tabernacle Presbyterian to find the world just as we’d left it.
Comment by: Helen
1 01/24/08 6:31 AM | Comment Link |Traci, I’m very much enjoying reading your comments about the meetings (Beth’s too).
I’m glad you felt so at home you would have happily gone back to this group.
I’m curious: was there anything in the talk that has caused you to think differently about your life or change anything about your life?
Also, did it bother you that Marilyn referred to the ‘deep pain of being disconnected from God’? Have you ever felt deep pain over this? (Presumably you wouldn’t say you’re connected with God) If not does that mean you’re successfully covering the pain with addictions?
I’m confused in general about Marilyn’s view of addictions. Is it ok or not ok that addictions help people not feel pain? Is that a fine way to get rid of pain if the addiction is ‘relatively harmless’? Or should people be trying to resolve the cause of the pain instead and get rid of it that way?
I guess the reason I’m asking and wondering about this is, I think it would bother me to be in a friendly group of women where I had problems with the ‘teaching’. I’m not sure I could do that anymore, because in reality, I’ve never been in a Christian group like that where it would be ok to strongly and openly (albeit respectfully) disagree with ‘the teacher’.
What do you think would happen if someone disagreed with Marilyn? Did anyone disagree with her in this meeting? Was her material even presented in a ‘feel free to argue with me if you don’t agree’ way?
(I wrote about this implicit limit on what it was ok to say in groups I was in a couple of years ago in The Range of Acceptable Answers (ROAA))
Comment by: Traci
2 01/24/08 8:02 AM | Comment Link |HELEN: Yeah, I’m with you. I couldn’t have enjoyed myself as much if I thought the message was off track, but it was very practical and logical. Throughout the lesson, people chimed in, asked questions, and made comments, so although nobody said, “I don’t think that’s right,” that kind of thing wouldn’t have been out of place. It’s a thinky environment.
Because Marilyn included “others and ourselves” in the “disconnect” message, I didn’t get hung up on the God thing. I knew where I was, after all.
When I was young and still trying to believe, I guess I felt “disconnected from God,” or would have interpreted what I felt that way, given that nuns were telling me I just wasn’t opening my heart or some shit. But no. Being “disconnected from God” is not anything I can apply to my life. Her message about paying attention to where I spend my time and money was, though. And that business about refocusing is eminently useful.
Comment by: Helen
3 01/24/08 9:37 AM | Comment Link |Thanks Traci.
I was guessing you didn’t feel disconnected from God but I thought I’d check. I often hear Christians assuming that people who aren’t Christians are in denial or in pain due to their disconnection but my own sense is that lots of people who aren’t Christians are quite happy in their disconnection and it’s not because they are ‘in denial’. They might have other things in life to be upset about (most people do) but that doesn’t seem to be an issue.
I can well imagine Marilyn gave good practical advice. I was listening to the recorded session #6 and it’s full of very practical advice about marriage which I agreed with and thought was excellent.
That’s part of the irony for me - why add the theology - why not just give the practical tips? But I respect that for some people (including Marilyn, probably), the theology is all-important.
Comment by: Lonnie
4 01/24/08 9:58 AM | Comment Link |Helen,
Golly, pretty heavy for an all-going-well first date, which is how Beth’s and Traci’s posts have made me feel. Fun, light, and witty with just the right amount of enlightenment. You two are obviously a pair of real deal dudettes, and I love the pace you’ve chosen for letting the world get to know you. Keep on keeping on.
Comment by: Helen
5 01/24/08 12:00 PM | Comment Link |Lonnie - you’re right…sometimes my issues get in the way…
I’m glad you’re enjoying the series.
Comment by: karen
6 01/24/08 4:36 PM | Comment Link |Sounds like a really cool group. They are affiliated with the Presbyterian Church U.S.A., where I was raised and baptised (sprinkled, of course!).
Glad you had fun. :-)
Comment by: benjamin ady
7 01/24/08 6:53 PM | Comment Link |Traci,
I find your writing and your attitude profoundly connective for me. As in, I keep saying “yeah–perfectly and exactly what she said”
And it’s extremely entertaining as well. Thankyou for writing!
I liked:
Comment by: Micah
8 01/24/08 9:46 PM | Comment Link |“Some people might stop drinking and start a War on Terror,” came a suggestion. Laughter. Follow-up: “Every time I hear him talking, I think, ‘He really needs more treatment.’”
What Christian could utter such blasphemy? I think I am beginning to see why you felt so at home.
Comment by: benjamin ady
9 01/25/08 12:35 AM | Comment Link |Micah–are you serious? What do you mean when you say “blasphemy” in this context?
I mean … have you seen this video? (and lots more like it)
Comment by: Beth Bates
10 01/25/08 4:28 AM | Comment Link |Micah, I admire the courage it takes to stand up for your man Dubya in a not-so-conservative room. You’ve got some cojones.
Comment by: laurie
11 01/25/08 10:37 AM | Comment Link |Beth - to me, that was a great way to “defend the space”
Comment by: Laurie
12 01/25/08 3:20 PM | Comment Link |OK…. I’ve been struggling with this off and on all afternoon…
What do we do now?
Micah was put off by something Traci reported. It sounds like she not only took offense to the content - but also the manner of the delivery.
I don’t want to accept Helen’s position that you just have to figure out the “range of acceptable answers” and stay in range….
So, what do we do when we enter a group and someone says something that is “off the cuff” and is not only counter to what we believe - but is said in such a dismissive way? How do we maintain relationship and maintain personal integrity?
And, how hamstrung do we need to be as individuals? I have a few people in my life with whom I can speak totally uncensored. Even if they don’t agree with me totally, their gift to me is the gift of listening. Then, when I’ve had a chance to dump… someone might offer a gentle nudge in the direction of a position that might be more sane.
How hard do we fight the ambiguity between personal integrity and social niceties when the group gets big? What principles tell us when to swing towards personal integrity - and what tell us to swing to social nicety?
I’ll throw out the only thing I know to do. And, I’d be glad to hear what others add….
The one thing I know to do is not to make things worse. And, there are words and strategies that may be more forceful - but in the end do nothing to increase listening…
Words like wacko, extremist, right wing, left wing, crazy, anything with Nazi after it like “femi-nazi,” always, never, only, stupid, uninformed, dependent, co-dependent, needy, brainless, lemming-like, wrong, right, schizophrenic, nutty, …well, you get the picture..
It’s stuff that says your view is stupid… “I dismiss your view as being laughable.”
I think that’s what Micah heard in Traci’s report.. Not a thoughtful disourse on our president - but a write-off of him being mentally ill.
And, is it OK for relaxed people to say stuff like that?
What does Micah do “in the moment?”
And then.. it looked to me like.. Micah was so jangled by this report that she increased the stakes… using a word like blasphemy… implying that Traci was only comfortable at a lower level…
How do we show support to Micah? How do we tell her that she is important to us?
How do we turn this around? Because, friends, if we don’t, we’ll keep perpetuating the cycle of miscommunication that has been plaguing us for centuries.
Sorry to get so maudlin… I’ve just seen too many “Micah’s” drop their verbal bombs and then go home. I want the Micah’s to stay in the game … but work with us to figure out the rules of engagement….
Comment by: Beth Bates
13 01/25/08 4:12 PM | Comment Link |Thanks, Laurie, for your compassion. You didn’t consider another option: I made Traci go to the mall with me! We haven’t been on much today. Trying to stay out of our heads before Tonight.
OH! There she is in my driveway! Gotta run-
b
Comment by: Helen
14 01/25/08 4:35 PM | Comment Link |Laurie, actually I hate the range of acceptable answers and to stay sane I need to have places where I’m not uncomfortably constrained by one.
Thanks for caring about Micah.
Ever since we had blogs we’ve asked people to respect each other and aim at being honest without being mean.
The reason it works is because of people like you, who are compassionate and see the person behind the words even when the words could throw us off.
The constant challenge in every group/community, including the ones which form online in conversations like this, is to avoid bonding by putting ‘outsiders’ down. If we do that, outsiders will be offended or feel unwelcome and stay away. And then we lose, because our conversation is less rich and diverse and interesting.
Micah is welcome to stay and interact with us if he/she wants to. We would ask him/her to respect others in the conversation.
Comment by: benjamin ady
15 01/25/08 8:51 PM | Comment Link |…
I can’t figure it being wrong to be dismissive of a man who lied to 300 million people in order to start and continue a war which has killed hundreds of thousands of innocents. It’s either that or be totally serious about him and what he’s done, which is just too painful to do all the time.
How many little Iraqi children, among the 2 million Iraqi refugees in neighboring foreign nations, are going to go to bed hungry tonite while people here freak out because someone says W is mentally instable? Priorities.
Am I missing something here?
Comment by: Traci
16 01/26/08 6:41 AM | Comment Link |Heckfire. I read Micah’s comment and thought he was ironizing. (Or ironising, Helen.)
In any case, my feeling is that everybody should feel welcome to comment to their heart’s content, preferably in a respectful tone.
Irony encouraged.
Comment by: Laurie
17 01/26/08 8:29 AM | Comment Link |Traci - my sentiments - I don’t want to be someone who takes everything as a personal attack
Benjamin - I think this issue with Bush informs what Beth and Traci are trying to do in this blog -
“What does it mean to have a real, respectful relationship when you don’t have the same view of something that each of you sees as a significant (not defining) factor in your life?”
I believe it is a dangerous thing to be given the post of deciding who I will attend to - and who I will dismiss. In the midst of disagreeing with someone - sometimes urgently - I try to cling to respect for as long as I can. That’s what I think defending the space is about.
What happens when someone hears me and says to another…“Every time I hear him(her) talking, I think, ‘(She)He really needs more treatment.’”???
That said, I still assert that we all need places where we can toss off what we think in an uncensored fashion. If I couldn’t let off steam with my friends - I might be addicted to something more destructive…
Comment by: Helen
18 01/26/08 8:59 AM | Comment Link |Traci wrote:
Exactly.
Agreed - as long as it’s not used to be mean to other people here.
I don’t know whether Micah was being serious or not (or what gender Micah is) and I don’t think we’ll ever know unless he/she comes back.
Such is the mystery of online dialog. Sometimes you don’t know and never find out.
Comment by: benjamin ady
19 01/26/08 11:54 AM | Comment Link |But here’s the thing, Helen. Nobody ever says that about you. It wouldn’t be funny if they did, it would just be stupid. Your words haven’t led to people dying. In fact, your words tend the opposite direction.
If I was married, for instance, to a … person who regularly engaged in verbal violence against me, I wouldn’t find it unacceptable to comment to them and others that the person needs treatment. What if I was in a position where it was nearly impossible to leave the relationship, for whatever reason? Then sometimes it would provide a little relief to laugh with others about it.
Which is to say, there *are* *evil* people, and it’s okay to make comments along those lines, and if the evil causes us a lot of pain, then it’s okay to laugh about it sometimes too.
Comment by: Helen
20 01/26/08 2:18 PM | Comment Link |Benjamin I don’t think I said that…?
Comment by: Micah
21 01/26/08 11:13 PM | Comment Link |Sorry to sidetrack the conversation there. I figured serious use of the word “blasphemy” was reserved for backwards theocracies and TBN newscasts. From now on, I will try to keep antiquated biblical terms to a minimum.
What I intended was to sarcastically mirror the clever Bush slight which showed that even Christians can be humorous and have their own opinions, despite the prevailing wisdom that all of them are blindly Bush devotees. I believe Benjamin has cemented this observation. Traci was particularly smart for including this in her report. Plus it was funny.
I loved this post. Keep them coming!
Comment by: Beth Bates
22 01/27/08 2:16 AM | Comment Link |Ah. The spirit of Stephen Colbert at work in your words . . .
Comment by: Helen
23 01/27/08 4:48 AM | Comment Link |Micah, I’m glad you were kidding :) Thanks for coming back to enlighten us!
Comment by: benjamin ady
24 01/27/08 10:22 AM | Comment Link |Helen
OMG–I misquoted you. Sorry!!! Thank you for being gracious about it. I guess that maybe that was Laurie?
Micah,
Thanks for clarifying. We should get together for a beer sometime. I know this great little place in the U-district. I suppose the chances that you’re in Seattle are slim to none. Ah well.
How about Obama yesterday?! =)
Comment by: Helen
25 01/27/08 10:31 AM | Comment Link |No problem, Benjamin. I was thinking to think of a reply then I realized “Hey I don’t have to - I didn’t say this!”
Yes, I was pleased about Obama yesterday.
Comment by: Beth Bates
26 01/27/08 4:34 PM | Comment Link |To clarify regarding the “treatment” quote. IN the context of the Tab. Pres. Women Alive group, the topic at hand was addictions and how it’s counterproductive to focus on an addiction in order to kick one. Instead, the point being made was to substitute a less harmful addiction such as exercise. So a member makes an off the cuff comment “or like starting a war on terror” (in place of drinking). That person’s follow up editorial comment was, “Everytime I hear him talk I think he needs more treatment” or something to that effect. She then apologized and said, “Sorry, I’ve been reading McLaren…”
Does that clear things up?